Smoking causes cancer

[wmspringer]

Will we be getting a follow-up article on HOW to choose the best tables?

[7n7]

I very much enjoyed this "kick yourself in the butt" article. I am guilty on all charges...except for the fact I've never smoked.

I just committed yesterday after a poor month of March to really start focusing in on what my major poker malfunction is. This article is the start of many that will hopefully help me see the light.

Keep 'em coming!

[Bottled Rockets]

A completely awesome article! Well-argued, L.

[GeniusToad]

i like where the new lorinda series is headed. very interesting angle to take.
major improvement over T.C. which i found to be meandering and pointless although, at times, amusing.

my only problem with it is this:
[ QUOTE ]
I recommend that you print this out and read it in the bathroom. That way you will save valuable time.

[/ QUOTE ]

please ignore this suggestion for the sake of the trees.
other than that, great job.

[Zetack]

Personally, I feel like I have three hours of good poker playing in me. I wonder what Lorinda bases her statement about your play deteriorating after two hours?

[Kel]

I don't know, but I can't really select the table I play in a brick-and-mortar casino. It's usually a pretty long wait for any limit and I just make sure I play better than most players at that limit. And sometimes only one fish can make a table quite profitable

[NewGuy]

For my money, L is one of the best pure writers in the magazine. My interest in the fiction she wrote was a bit hit or miss, but I always enjoy reading when someone has an ironclad grasp of both logic and how to use the English language.


[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I feel like I have three hours of good poker playing in me. I wonder what Lorinda bases her statement about your play deteriorating after two hours?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the 2-hour period was somewhat arbitrary. What I took away is that it is more significant to your results to play focused & at your best (i.e., by taking breaks) vs. ensuring every second of the time you set aside for a poker session is spent playing (rather than scouting and/or resting your brain).

[lorinda]

[ QUOTE ]

I think the 2-hour period was somewhat arbitrary. What I took away is that it is more significant to your results to play focused & at your best (i.e., by taking breaks) vs. ensuring every second of the time you set aside for a poker session is spent playing (rather than scouting and/or resting your brain).

[/ QUOTE ]

Thankyou for everyone's comments in this thread.

The above quote pretty much sums up the answer to the question about concentration, although I learned some years ago that 50 minutes is considered the top end of the scale for the "normal" range.

A quick search since reading the posts here has shown that number to be thought of very differently by different people/establishments, but 20-50 minutes seems to be the accepted guess. I have however only read four links but they did seem to be good ones. (Sample size... I know)

I used the two hour figure as a number much larger than 50 minutes, so yes, it was rather arbitary.
Something else I have learned since writing the article is that some people (and I suspect this applies to many 2+2ers) appear to concentrate for much much longer. It does however transpire that they are usually very good at taking many very small breaks, so small they don't even know they're doing it. (I assume we're talking 10-20 seconds where they stare into space etc)

I would imagine that multi-tabling online gives less chance for these mini-breaks than live play, but if I wrote any more about that subject, I'd be into the realms of guesswork.

Lori

[SirFelixCat]

Lorinda,
Just wanted to say that I found this months piece fantastic. Very well put and spot-on. Anxious to read next month's, and, in the meantime, put this to good use.

Thank you!

[Warren Whitmore]

Hi Springer,

I recently did a study of this for online play. Of course all of the data collected (3000 hours worth) was on me and so I do not know if it would be transferable to anyone else or not. The method of collection was a taguchi style matrix system.

The best game profit wise turned out to be 5 handed limit stud. The initial variable for game selection was site selection. The softest games were on the worst internet sites. Aparently the better players leave a site and dont come back once it crashes a few times, has bad graphics, and low usage rates. Find the 3 worst sites.

Derive a slop of the Y=Mx+b sort where y = BB/hr ev and X=% of people seeing the flop. In My case the formula is Y=-0.0082X(squared) + 1.1784X -38.505. Yours will of course be different depending on if you play better than me or worse. Have that curve printed out above your computer. check all of the game candidates to find the BB/hr and multiply by the BB limit of the game. This will assure that you are always starting int he highest positive EV game available.

Next using an excell spreedsheet name each of the 4 opponants. In the 2nd through 4th column list SK, R, M, C
for Stone killer, Rock, Mainiac, Calling station. Each hand that you see played through add a number to the way that opponant played that hand based on Schoonmakers reccomendations. (SK means the way 2+2 would have reccomended playing the hand or stone killer).

You will find that the % stone killer is the number which correlates most tightly as a second degree polynomial to game EV and exceedes in Rsquared value the % of people seeing the flop. Mine is Y=-0.004X(squared) + 0.2999X - 1.6795.

Of course as you collect data on your opponants besides changing your play to optimize EV you will be playing to a style preferable to the overall table style. I reccoment using the conclusion page in the theory of poker for this purpose.

As you gain data you will find that your EV improves the longer you play with the same opponants because you will have more information on them than they have on you. Your ev will go down over time because you will become more tiered. The intersection of these two curves for me Ironically was exactly 2 hours. The same as Lorinda came up with. I then take a 10 minute break. When I come back and repeat the process. Sometimes to rejoin the same table more often repeating the process.

The other variable was session lenth and delta between sessions. This is the sequence of times of play.
6-8 am
10 minute break
8:10 am to 10am

8 hour break

6-8Pm
10 minute break
8:10PM-10PM

I hope this helps, it has worked well for me.

[CardSharpCook]

Agreed that Lori is perhaps the best pure writer on this forum.

As for table selection, look for tables with several fish and try to sit to the left of people with high VPIPs or PFRs and to the right of TAGs. Best seat is having a 45/4 in seat one, a 25/20 in seat 2, you in seat 3, and two 15/11s behind you. Other fish at that table would just be gravy.

[JacksonTens]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I feel like I have three hours of good poker playing in me

[/ QUOTE ]

3 hours??? I play 10-12 hr live sessions no breaks. No Ipod. Patience is my virtue. Conversations are key. Very tiring work mind you.

JT